More stupid lockdown questions....

Don't take this in anything other than the spirit it is intended i.e. my opinion as to why NZ (and latterly, Australia) are not good analogues for how the UK could have / could handle a lockdown.
IMHO and political will aside, it is less disruptive to both Aus and NZ to pull down the shutters, than it is for the UK to do the same.

The UK is (a group) of islands, yes, but is only 22 miles from the next landmass. People swim across (regularly), take dinghies across, as well as trains, ferries, and planes.
Aus and NZ? 1200-odd miles.

There are more people (probably) in the Birmingham and Manchester combined, than in the whole of NZ.
At a 15th of the population density.
Australia? 25 million, at a density of little more than 1% of that of the UK.


Oz is hugely popular, tourism.

Heathrow alone handles ten times more people p.a., than visit the whole of Australia.

It's also very popular for education.

It may well be, but I don't see the relevance, other than it trifles in comparison to the UK?

It's one of top economies of the world.

As is the UK but, Aus' is fundamentally different to the UK, in that it extracts and exports vast mineral and energy wealth. As a proportion of their economy, "people" and "people-movement" is a much smaller part of theirs, than ours.

What exactly is a 'world hub' anyway?

People go "to" and "from" Aus and NZ, generally.
People go "to", "from", and "through" the UK. In vastly-greater numbers.
 
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Back
Top